IMDb user comments for
Manhunter (1986)

advertisement

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 37:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

364 comments in total

---

81 out of 98 people found the following comment useful :-
Pretty Good!, 21 April 2003
Author: tony-clifton from Edmonton, Canada

I have a problem with a lot of people's review of "Manhunter". Every single bad review that criticizes Cox or Noonan invariably mentions the movie "Red Dragon" in the same breath. How about being a little objective?

On its own as the original Hannibal Lecter movie, Manhunter is a good movie. Cox plays Lecter convincingly, and you can read from other reviewers who praised his work shows that with a little objectivity we can see an alternative representation of Lecter. It is true, as one other reviewer says, Hopkins acts Lecter, Cox *IS* Lecter. Cox never seems to be acting, he really plays the part with mystery and ambiguity not like the distinctly maniacal Lecter that Hopkins portrays.

Cox plays a true psychopath - one devoid of feelings, and yet a consummate actor. Some of the world's best actors are in fact psychopaths. A psychopath is not necessarily a killer - a psychopath is simply someone who does not feel for other human beings, which is often why the psychopath killers of this world were in fact convincing actors - for example Geoffrey Dahmer and Charles Manson.

So when we analyze the profiles of true psychopathic serial killers, we can quite clearly see that Cox plays the better Lecter than Hopkins. We can see Cox is devoid of compassion, and yet acts like a normal person. Hopkins on the other hand, never passes the creepy stage - he is too creepy and doesn't have the "acting" ability of a true psychopath to mask that image from the public eye. Cox shows that he could blend into normality without being caught.

And therein lies the problem with the negative reviews. We read countless negative reviews of this movie bemoaning the fact that Cox is not as creepy as Hopkins - but my dears, that is exactly why Cox plays the better Lecter!

---

76 out of 96 people found the following comment useful :-
Blasphemous opinion, 1 December 2002
Author: kevin-186 from Iowa

This will no doubt elicit howls of outrage, but I have always thought that Mr. Cox's portrayal of Hannibal Lector to be far superior to that of Mr Hopkins'. Mr Cox portrays Lector as someone coldly intellectual, almost reptilian and inhuman, while Mr Hopkins gives a performance that always brings to mind that of Ernest Thesiger as Dr. Pretorius in Bride of Frankenstein". Mind you, I really enjoy Ernest Thesiger as Dr. Pretorius; I'm just saying that the charming, witty and OH! so urbane serial killer has been done to death, and had been even when "Silence Of The Lambs" came out. Rent this video if you want to see how it's supposed to be done.

---

60 out of 70 people found the following comment useful :-
A positive review!, 15 October 2001
Author: Kris Didymus from London, England

How many times have we heard "The film isn't as good as the book"? Let's face it. What film IS?! Red Dragon was a masterpiece and so is Manhunter.

To appreciate that there are two issues. Firstly, the film was created in 1986. It's stylised and looks slightly dated. The soundtrack is excellent but again very 1980's. Secondly, Red Dragon was not an easy book to write a screenplay for. There is way too much information that made the book so enthralling to squeeze in to 2 hours.

The cinematography, in particular the clever use of light and colours, is breathtaking. The choice of locations was also very deliberate. The scene where Will is running out of the building after speaking to Hannibal Lecter. They chose a building with a long spiral ramp down. The ramp is white, clinical. Running down the ramp is like those dreams where the bad man is chasing you and you can't get away. Will runs his heart out but doesn't get very far.

I agree that Cox plays a different Lecter but then the book wasn't about Lecter. There was some mention made but Lecter in this film is very much a Cameo appearance. The way in which Will goes about catching the killer is every bit as clever as Starling's methods, if not more so. In addition, we are treated to the thoughts, the inner monologue, the frustration and triumph of a hunter.

Make no mistake, if you expect an up-to-date movie as good in every respect as the book, you'll be disappointed. If you're sensible and expect nothing more than 2 hours quality entertainment you'll enjoy this one.

---

30 out of 38 people found the following comment useful :-
Underrated and generally forgotten, 11 May 2000
Author: kryloman from New York

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

To start with, I've read 'Red Dragon' many, many times, and it is one of my favorite novels ever...and, as is, virtually unfilmable. The centerpiece of the book is a long, detailed flashback detailing the motives (and practically the entire life) of the killer; it's the kind of thing you can get away with in print, but in a movie it'd stop the story dead. And so, alas, it's completely absent here. Too much background material is jettisoned in the translation and too much time is spent on Will Graham, the policeman in pursuit, for this to come even close to the brilliant novel it's based on, but it's honestly about as good a movie as could have been made from this material.

The best things, really, are the performances: William Petersen is occasionally a little wooden as Graham (and no one, really, could stand there and talk to himself in lines that were silent thoughts in the book) but appropriately haggard and obsessed; Kim Griest, one of the best near-forgotten actresses of the eighties, captures the character of Graham's wife perfectly, and Tom Noonan is fascinating and frightening in equal measures as the Red Dragon (no mean feat, when we never really find out why he's doing what he's doing). Joan Allen does a good turn as a blind woman he falls in love with, in a relationship so obviously doomed that it causes suspense just by existing. Dennis Farina is his usual solid self as Petersen's superior. Altogether, the cast does its best to convey characterizations with the minimum of information the film actually has, and do surprisingly well.

The film itself is about as stylish and eighties-era as you'd expect, and tolerance of it probably depends on how much you hated the eighties, but Michael Mann never really *gratuitously* overuses songs on the soundtrack, and everything fits pretty well. It's a bit low-budget, but at times this makes it harsher and more frightening; the creepy climax where Dolarhyde terrorizes the blind woman to "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida" makes an interesting parallel to the later, more expensive-looking night-vision-goggle scene in The Silence of the Lambs. Don't look for nearly as compelling or rich a story as in the novel, but if you want to be drenched in squalid atmosphere for a couple hours (for the token, inevitable comparison to Miami Vice, it's like Miami Vice with a truly weird, frightening story and characters who actually seem like real people) this is definitely of interest.

---

19 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :-
Suspenseful and fun, 26 November 2002
Author: justmjw from Covington, KY USA

As I watched Manhunter the first time I kept thinking something about it seemed familiar. From the credits I discovered it was from Red Dragon by Thomas Harris, a book I had read.

William Peterson plays the enigmatic FBI agent Will Graham, who has left the job after almost being killed by Hannibal Lechter, but who is now coaxed back to help catch a killer who is murdering whole families in different locations in the United States.

I enjoyed Brian Cox as Lechter. He displays the "normal" quality of Lechter which allowed him to go undetected for so long before being arrested and receiving the moniker, "Hannibal the Cannibal". Perhaps because I saw Manhunter before Silence of the Lambs, I prefer Cox to Anthony Hopkins in the role.

The Freddy Lounds character is the stereotypical reporter you love to hate. He's in Graham's face and as obnoxious as they come. You almost root for something bad to happen to him.

Tom Noonan is delightful as the quiet Francis Dolarhyde. He's the loner that no one notices. I pitied him, then I feared him.

I recommend this film for those who enjoy suspense with a bit of a horror twist. It's not a horror film, but some of the elements are there. There is also a good soundtrack.

---

19 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :-
What? No Tattoos?!, 14 October 2002

Author: billymac72 from Chicago, IL

I'm starting to think that I may be one of the only people who saw this film when it was originally theatrically released! Years after that, as a freshman in college, I was managing a video store when a woman came in looking for the recently released `Silence of the Lambs.' She said she knew William Petersen from childhood and told me that he was in THE first Hannibal the Cannibal movie. Having not read the novel or seen the movie for a while, I never related the two before that. But I specifically remembered `Manhunter' for its creepy killer, spectacular use of Iron Butterfly, and the strange & frightening notion (for then) of FBI profiling. These three details alone speak volumes for the film's acting, style and writing. The irony of forcing oneself to share the same maniacal thoughts as a killer in order to catch them is the stuff of nightmares. Since reconnecting with `Manhunter' back then, I've remained a constant fan of the film.

But the film suffers today in several ways. First off, any comparison to `Silence of the Lambs' is going to come up short. `Silence' is simply a better film – a classic of the highest caliber that will continue to sustain itself with the passage of time. Those already acquainted with Jonathan Demme's world will probably have a hard time accepting `Manhunter.' But audiences should judge the film on its own merits, and recognize that unlike `Red Dragon' it was not designed to resemble an established world of a classic movie – which is both a curse and an advantage for both films. I recently saw `Red Dragon,' by the way, and loved it. Walking out, I found myself asking whether I liked it better than `Manhunter.' These comparisons can get very silly because not only am I basing my impressions on a book, but also a previously filmed version and a closely related `sequel.' Best method: let each stand alone, THEN decide if either was successful. Both films succeed for similar and different reasons.

The approach of `Manhunter' is much more cold and observational than `Red Dragon.' This style (often concerned with widely symmetrical composition), like Kubrick's, can greatly benefit the story if used properly. I really liked it here. The neatness and sterility of the 80s décor also works perfectly in this format, providing a nice contrast to the horrors sometimes contained within its walls.

As for the music, it has not aged well. The synthesized stuff in the first hour is effective at times (especially when it's just a single, sustained note a la John Carpenter, or those bits that sound like `Blade Runner'), and the inclusion of In-a-Gadda-da-Vida is inspired, but the electronic balladry during Dolarhyde's romance is simply awful and detract from the scenes. Obviously, the danger of using such modern music is that it can become outdated and cheesy very quick. Is it just me, or does this especially seem true of 80s music? Given Michael Mann's career, he clearly wouldn't agree. I guess one never knows. The Tangerine Dream score for `Risky Business' or Phillip Glass' for `Thin Blue Line,' for example, still hold up remarkably well from this period.

The performances, however, are still wonderful. Petersen (whom I've heard didn't like the job he did) reaches just the right blend of seeming haunted, detached, morose, and as Dolarhyde describes him, purposeful. Dennis Farina, himself a former Chicago cop, exudes realistic authority as Jack Crawford. Tom Noonan obtains a disturbing childlike innocence and deliberation in his terror. And Brian Cox…poor guy, will always be compared to Anthony Hopkins. It's unfair because he gives us a Lecter that is different, to be sure, but intelligent in a way that, to me, is more realistic, intriguing and ultimately frightening. Hopkins' Hannibal is so supremely horrible that he's practically supernatural at this point, not unlike Dracula or the Wolfman. I enjoy all of that too, but just on a different level.

8/10

---

20 out of 25 people found the following comment useful :-
are you all crazy?, 25 April 2006

Author: judithlaib2000 from United Kingdom

I can only surmise that the detractors of this film are under 25, the new generation of cinema-goers who need all the ultra-violence and gore to make a film "complete". This is quite simply, one of the best films of all time. Tom Noonan is amazing and absolutely masterful in his portrayal of Dollarhyde, and even comes across as sensual, when he is obviously deriving sexual satisfaction watching Reba fondle the sleeping tiger. One of the sexiest scenes ever, by the way. This is what I think people who don't "get" this film are missing, the little nuances, such as his look of sexual ecstasy watching Reba with the tiger, you can see he is imagining himself in the tigers position, being the recipient of loving caresses. And his awkwardness when Reba finally makes love to him, its all these things that you actually have to engage your brain to understand, thats where people just don't understand this film. The music is incredible, especially Shriekbacks "This Big Hush", where Dollarhyde is in bed with Reba, is just inspired. William Petersen was born to play Will Graham, the tormented retired forensic cop, brought out of retirement by the Tooth Fairy's slayings of whole families. Brian Cox's portrayal of LECKTOR is superb, playing the "straight man" to Hopkins "over the top" campness. I cant understand why Cox didn't play the proper Lecktor role in the subsequent films. But thats what people don't get-its not about Lecktor. Its not about Red Dragon. It is BASED on the novel Red Dragon, which is why it doesn't follow the book ad verbatim. Don't watch this as a prequel or sequel, watch it on its own merit as one of the best films ever made.

---

29 out of 43 people found the following comment useful :-
One of my top 5 best movies, 7 February 2001

Author: Michael Barksdale (krowboy80@hotmail.com) from Danville, VA

Michael Mann's 1986 adaption of the Thomas Harris novel Red Dragon now titled Manhunter is without a doubt one of the best thrillers (or can I say horror movies) ever made (I say horror because what else do you call movies about serial killers). Manhunter is a winner on every level, from directing (but what did you expect from Michael Mann), acting, and all the other major technical jobs. I actually think it's better than Silence of the Lambs because it involves you more with the characters and what goes into catching a killer thus making it that much more intense. Now don't get me wrong Silence of the Lambs is really good and Jonathan Demme did a great job but the only reason some think it is the superior Lecter movie is because it is the mainstream Lecter movie, but for that I applaud it (how many other movies has been loved by the public and won oscars yet has a guy sling jizz in a woman's face). Manhunter is, like all of Mann's movies, kinda artsy but thats also one of the things about his movies that make them so good. And no other directer except maybe Oliver Stone or David Lynch knows how to use music to set the mood better than Michael Mann, be it the score or songs in general. The performances in Manhunter are all good except William Petersen's and Tom Noonan's which were GREAT!!! William Petersen does a great job at showing the emotional toll the search for the killer has on him mentally, and I love the fact that he's a good guy with a kind of dark side in him. There is something in Petersen's face that to me really shows his determination in catching the "tooth fairy" and he really is an underrated actor who should have bigger roles than he does. Tom Noonan has made a career out of playing villians (at least until lately), the only ones that kinda stick out are The Ripper from Last Action Hero and Cain in Robocop 2. But those were typical bad guys and his performance as Francis Dollarhyde in Manhunter is hands down the best depiction of a serial killer ever. Now I say that without knowing anything about serial killers other than whats on the news and in books but I'm sure they have some feelings (nobody's totally evil) and Tom Noonan shows this in his performance. The killer is a cold blooded killer but has a human side that is shown once he meets Joan Allen's character. There were scenes between them that really showed (through Noonan's performance) how messed up Dollarhyde is, like when she is kissing him and they have sex there is this look of unease and being totally uncomfortable on his face that really help flesh out the character. Brian Cox, who played Lecter or actually Lecktor, does great with his performance also but this movie isn't about Lecter so he's only in it for 10 minutes at the most but does great with that time, his Lecter doesn't come off as being the embodiment of evil like the Hopkins performance but his Lecter is more of a sly, manipulitive character. Not that I'm saying he's better than Anthony Hopkins because Mr. Hopkins deserved everything he got because of his performance but different movies have different interpretations. The movie does leave out some things about Dollarhyde's past but I think they were not needed because Tom Noonan did enough on his part, but the ending does change a lot but then again after creating such a compelling character as Will Graham (one of my fave characters ever...right up there with William Sommerset from Se7en) I didn't want him to get mutilated and almost killed like in the books ending. Plus if you think the killer is dead yet there is some hesitation in that AND the killer knows where you live I don't think you would go back to that house with your wife and child like in the book....oh and the kid's name is changed from Willy to Kevin but Willy would sound so corny, can u imagine the scene where Kim Griest says "stay here with me...me and Kevin" being "stay here with me...me and Willy" you wouldn't be thinking of the scene itself u would be thinking "who the hell would name there child Willy". And the director's cut does add some more depth to the characters and the new scene at the end where Graham visits the family that was to be Dollarhyde's next victim's is really good, it's not all dialogue like "you saved our lives" and all that s**t, it's played in the character's face....there needed to be no dialogue for it. Manhunter is one of the best movies ever in my opinion and will ALWAYS be one of the best of it's sub-genre. Hat's off to Michael Mann and Anchor Bay for releasing that limited edition DVD. One more thing this movie has my fave line of dialogue from Lecter, the whole "have you ever seen blood in the moonlight" scene was cool.

---

22 out of 30 people found the following comment useful :-
Scarier than "Lambs" ..., 19 November 2001

Author: ericjg623 from Twin Cities

This movie is basically the prequel to "Silence of the Lambs". It received nowhere near as much attention, nor any Academy Awards, but nonetheless, as a purely scary movie, it is the better of the two. Hannibal Lecter isn't as memorable, nor as well acted, but he's more real, more frightening. Unlike in SOTL, he is a direct threat to the principal good guy, in that he nearly killed FBI agent Will Graham and drove him to near madness. Graham is the man responsible for capturing Lecter, but to do so, he had to get further inside Lecter's head than is safe for sane humans, and throughout the film we fear that he, in pursuit of a new serial killer, is in grave danger of losing his sanity in the process.

To add to the terror, Lecter is playing his mind games, while supposedly helping Graham, he is also secretly in cahoots with the killer, known only as the "tooth fairy". Aside from dealing with the physical and psychological dangers presented by Lecter, Graham must also try to reconstruct the mindset of the killer, and this provides the real drama of this film. He is a man on the edge, he's been through psychological hell thanks to Lecter and wants nothing more than to live in peace with his wife and son, but when his old boss Jack Crawford enlists his help, showing him photos of the murdered families, he cannot refuse. And throughout the entire film we are drawn into his struggle, the battle between his unique genius for seeing into the minds of psychotic serial killers versus his desire to maintain his sanity, protect his family, and simply lead a normal life. As such, Graham is a far more compelling character than was Jodie Foster's Agent Starling. Although this movie has its flaws (chiefly, a "Miami Vice" like reliance on its music soundtrack) it is a genuinely frightening psychological thriller that is definitely more scary than its more famous and critically acclaimed successor.

---

11 out of 16 people found the following comment useful :-
'Hannibal' Before He Became Famous, 14 October 2006

Author: ccthemovieman-1 from Lockport, NY, United States

This was the first look at Hannibal Lechter, but it really didn't have the impact of "Silence Of The Lambs" and the two subsequent movies also dealing with Lechter. Those - "Hannibal" and "Red Dragon" (a re-make of this movie) - all had Anthony Hopkins as the famous criminal. Hopkins "take" on the character was so memorable, so riveting that he made it his own. In this movie, Lechter is not memorable. Few people could tell you who played him in this film. The answer: Brian Cox.

That's not to say it's a bad film. It isn't, but it's no great shakes, either. The first half is very suspenseful but the second half of the movie is disappointing. It is interesting to look back now and see a young Bill Peterson in the lead. I am used to seeing the CSI television star as a more mature "Gil Grissom."

I watched this movie back in the '80s before I knew Petersen, Cox, Hopkins and the rest.....and it was better. Sorry to say, the other films have simply eclipsed this effort.

---

---

Page 1 of 37:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Amazon.com summary	Ratings	Awards
Newsgroup reviews	External reviews	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history